The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum The Emerging Church on Nightline

Did anyone see Nightline Friday night? They did a brief report on the the Emerging Church movement. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Here's the Nightline homepage

and here's the direct video link

Dave,

I didn't see the Nightline program Friday night but I opened the link to the video you provided. One of the really sad things about the mindset of this pastor who was being interviewed and those who are attracted to the emerging church is that it's an alternative to the true church. Unfortunately it doesn't have any of the marks of a true church. He seems to feel he's meeting people's needs and judging by the comments of his parishioners they feel it meets their needs too. Isn't that nice. He's found out that there is a market out there for religious consumerism if you just give the people what they want. This kind of thinking is catering to our culture rather than changing it according to God's Word. Generation Xers will only be confused by the variety of churches that emerge which have little resemblance or connection to other churches much less a real church.

This pastor made reference to various movements in the church which have been making changes to the church's identity over the years because of modernism and now post-modernism. I think in the video he said that they've been told that they were a threat to the "traditional church." He flatters himself but I'm sure his opinion is based on numbers, peoples comments, the culture, and has nothing to do with what the Scriptures have to say about the church.

The emerging church is concerned with the deconstruction and reconstruction of Protestant Christianity in a postmodern cultural context. Isn't it interesting how Nightline highlights the emerging church movement which is just another example of misguided attempts to satisfy the human need, call it a religious experience, and market it to the consumer?


Wes

Yeah they cater to everyone. Someone even had their dog with them!

I noticed that, too. Wow! I hope they didn't give the DOG communion.

Kyle,


The emerging church does indeed cater to people who want a "feel good" gospel. I think Isaiah puts it best in Isaiah 30:9-11.


Denny

Roms 3:22-24

There you go you just had to say it didn't you! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> If a woman can "marry a dolphin" then its just a matter of time before someone thinks dogs can take communion cause "they're people too". But its too late now its out in the internet. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/Banghead.gif" alt="" />

I saw some of that special. It was just flat creepy.

So CAN the elect be decieved? Or are all these folks lost or what?

That's a question that keeps coming to my mind. I think it's a bit of both. I don't come from a seeker sensitive or emerging church, but I do come from a church that also taught heretical doctrine and God saved me in spite of that.

Also, there are undoubtedly unbelievers in churches that faithfully preach God's Word, so likewise why couldn't there be a remnant of believers that are in churches that do not? I guess the logical conclusion would be if there are true believers that are in churches like these then they would eventually leave.

Maybe the answer is the elect can be deceived for a season? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/Ponder.gif" alt="" />

Yes if one doesn't keep on top of things like I didn't for a while in my church, one can be deceived for a season. The Holy Spirit is going to lead that person out of a church eventually. The elect person should have "red flags" and feel a "disconnect" with the error around them at some point. They should want to leave in their heart at least. That's my opinion.

Something I pondered about my prior church was are these pastors saved? Well I really don't know for sure, but then I concluded does it really matter or not? If saved (and they themselves are being deceived) they are still in error and I cannot stand with them. My trust in their discernment was lost either way. Maybe if they are in the kingdom, God is using our family leaving against them to help correct them. Who knows except the Lord of course. All I knew is that I didn't belong there. And honestly I don't miss our church at all after being gone over a month. Actually after visiting another (more biblically grounded) church in the last two weeks and hearing some "meat" in the sermon it kind of makes me more angry all the "wasted" time we spent at the prior church. Well no use crying over spilled milk. I am just thankful that we are gone.

My church wasn't quite like the one on the Nightline Show. Our church did have candles around and a "band" for worship (which I didn't like because I could never hear myself sing). And we did have new art on the walls with the new pastor though. And his response to why we had this art is that it is there to help those who find art as a way to connect with God. Hmmm.....how does that hold water with the 2nd and 3rd commandments?? (at least that was one of my thoughts to his statement). To me that is one of the disturbing things I saw in the Emergent Church movement and in my church - the issue of catering to people's ways they want to connect with God. The Bible becomes just one of the ways to connect with God.

Let me preface myself by saying that I only saw the video David provided a link to. Let me also say that I have no stance at this time about the Emerent Movement, I'm still assessing and gathering information to make my all purpose judgement to embrace or condemn this segement of Christianity because that is, of coarse, what we are called a Christians to do, we're to make judgements that those who preach Christ crucified but have a different tradition, doctrine, or methodology are either acceptable (a.k.a. they are really our own general tradition) or they're not. I personally try to rejoice at the preaching of Christ even if it's for the wrong reason because I respect the tradition set out by the Apostle Paul.

Anyway, David didn't really ask a question beyond "Did we see it?" To which I have to say I didn't but appreciate seeing this video clip. Thanx David.

Unfortunately I feel like contributing something to the discussion which I'm told is usually bad for me to do, but anyway, here go's.

Not all emergents are lost and not all non-emergent Christians are saved!

Yeah, really. And I didn't think the video was all that creepy either (except for the offering, but just about every church I've ever been to has one of those except for this methodist church who I guess believes in letting their giving be in secret so that they can be rewarded in the open). Really and truly it seemed as though they weren't all that different from a lot of "Low Church" people today in many established mainstream/evangelical/protestant/conservative/ whatever denominations. I should ammend that, the last time I saw candles used in a baptist or charismatic church (which I would never go to or enter, wink wink) was either a wedding or a Christmas Eve (afternoon) service.

Seems kinda scary to me that they use things like tires and drinks and loud music to praise God because of coarse we see in Acts and in the writings of Paul how only consecrated and "clean" or "holy" items can be used to praise God. Even scarier is that they remind me of this monk I once heard about, Brother Lawerence (some book called the Practice of the Presence of God) who's said to have washed dishes and praised God at the same time (while he was working!). It's scary that "these people" are reaching out to an age group which has typically not gone to church due in part to a lack of activities and that they're getting people into their churches. It's scary that they don't hold to a specific soteriology or ecclessiology or eschatology or methodology or something like that (in fact, some of them released this statement
http://www.anewkindofchristian.com/archives/000429.html
in which they clearly admit to making mistakes in their churches). Obviously anyone who doesn't get bent out of shape with their critics and who seeks peace with other Christians and acknowledges their sin and mistakes, who encourage people to follow their own leaders leadership and their own conscience, who say "Brothers, we are not professionals", who deny being epistemological relativist and instead claim to seek truth, who encourage direct conversation about the issues at hand, who acknowledge a division of opinions in one movement and accept only personal accountability instead of accepting accountability one individual for the entire movement; obviously such people are not to be trusted or even considered. Obviously, at the first sign of questionable doctrine or practice we can make this an open and shut case that these people aren't reformed and therefore aren't saved. Oh, but wait, there's that one Mars Hill Church or Mars Hill Bible Church or something like that which says they do believe in the 5 points, and monergism.com even points that out. But since God didn't spare sodom for 1 right on guy, we shouldn't spare a movement for one right on church and a few who're still trying to figure it out.

You know what's even scarier, these guys see themselves as part of the church universal, they don't necessarilly see themselves as a church alternative because they think that simply believing in Christ makes them a part of the church which the WCF (which as a Baptist I don't consider inerrant) says "which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof;". Wow, pretty scary. Really and truly, I think the WCF Chapter 25 has stuff to say about Emergent, perhaps I'll post on it sometime, or maybe someone will go back, dust off a copy, read it, and post before I get around to it.

And of coarse, we also have the issue of the sacred sacrimentology and the possibility that some creature other than a human had some bread or juice used in the ordinance. We all, knowing exactly the meaning and the power and the rules for the Sacriment, Euchrist, Lord's Supper, Communion, yeah, we all know so why don't they know that you're only to proclaim the gospel to humans (not all of Creation). Here's hoping that the crackers or the cookies or whatever they use didn't go to the dogs but the extra's were left to either rot in storage or to fill up a garbage can, cause that would definitely be more honoring to God, don't you think?

It is interesting that they seem to have reason to think that they've met the needs of people, I mean, come on, the United States Government in accordance with Scripture I'm sure, is taking care of widows and orphans and other people who have needs, why would a church have to meet people's needs? There's no need for needs in church!


All that aside, I've never heard of any of the people in this video clip except McLaren (a friend let me read some of his writings because I suggested that it was better to disprove a belief from within than from without, by knowing it instead of just randomly striking against it) and this clip is obtained through ABC and I think we all know that that station has nothing to do with Admitting, Believing, or Confessing. I think Mr. McLaren has seen hostility, a hostility and hatred which he may expect due not because he know's he's preaching against the Bible but because he's preaching the Bible (in his mind at least) and in doing so he expects what we so rarely get these days, attacks. He's probably read online in a message board not unlike this one, or on some blog or in a book or heard from some friend that he's considered a threat to the church. Personally I would find that discouraging, but he seems convinced that he's preaching truth and so he's expecting based on the teachings of Jesus which are supposed to be at the central focus of what he speaks, that persecution will come for Jesus Name sake. He may even be so "delusional" as to think that persecution from religious officials is a blessing.

Sipmly put, if Emergent is misguided, then there are several other groups who aren't exactly on coarse either because there are plenty of people out there trying to pitch the gospel as a product to fill up a felt need for a religious experience.

I was really impressed with Denny's two verse citations. Seems to me that in Isaiah 30:18, the next paragraph, that "therefore the Lord waits to be gracious to you(the ones who were blind and deaf); therefore he exalts himself to show mercy to you. For the Lord is a God of justice; blessed are all those who wait for him." and Romans 3 talks about there being "no distinction" in that all have sinned, and fallen short of the glory of God".

I'm so glad to know that God will judge the ignorant as the intellectual and that even though there's no distinction of us apart from the law, that some christians are far enough along that they not only can work out their own salvation with fear and trembling but they can do it for entire groups of "Christians" in completely different cities and circumstances and traditions etc. It really gives me something to aspire to.

Well, I think I've said enough and then some, cause this really is a scary movement full of really different ideas from the Bible. I sincerely hope that we can deal with this before we get to heaven and God has to get involved.

-Bro. Luke

Please take all comments with 2 pinches of salt and a happy thought and respond in the morning, and if you read this in the morning, I mean, respond tomorrow morning after you've had time to fully lay out my errors. I thank you all for any and all criticism because I'm sure any sarcastic statement I made herein is going to be terribly hard to find. NONE OF THESE STATEMENTS WERE MEANT PERSONALLY (so if you take them as such, they're not, get over it).

Whew!

Well I'm sure there's some Catholics that are saved too but I'm not going to jump on their bandwagon anytime soon. These folks scare me the most because they're just that much (fingers nearly touching) off plumb--half a bubble, maybe an eighth. But part of a lie is still a lie. Would you eat a brownie if it only had a "little" dog poop in it? No way.

One must first assess whether or not those in the Emerging Church movement are, in fact, "preaching [teaching] Christ". Personally, I cannot find the biblical Christ being preached nor taught in any of the Emerging Church literature, video clips, etc. that I have had the extreme displeasure of being exposed to. (Gal 1:7, 9)

Secondly, "methodology" isn't a matter of personal preference (adiaphora) or expediency (pragmatism)!! The Bible not only sets forth the truth objectively (dogma/doctrine) but also the principles of application of that doctrine. God hates vain worship, aka: "will worship" (cf. Gen 4:3-7; Ex 20:25; Ps 127:1; Isa 1:12-15; Ezk 20:39-42; Mal 1:6ff; Matt 15:7-9; Col 2:6ff; 1Jh 2:15-17; et al)

I'm assuming here that the above quote was made in sarcasm, right? But let me set the biblical record straight for you since you have admitted that you are still assessing the situation, which means you have not been able to discern the evil that is driving and has totally engulfed the Emergent Church movement and its adherents. The Church's primary responsibility is to "feed the flock", i.e., to offer up spiritual food so that the children of God may be complete. Secondarily, it is to reach out to the world with the proclamation of the great salvation which is in Christ. Eternal life takes precedence over temporal life. (cf. Lk 12; Matt 6:33) This is not to say that the people of God should not have social concerns, e.g., feeding the poor, helping those in physical need, etc. But it is NOT the primary concern. What good does it do to clothe one who is naked yet speak nothing of that which will effect that person's eternal destiny? The Emergent Church has bought into the Liberal's "Social Gospel" to a great degree, which is no gospel.

Misguided? To state that the Emergent Church is "misguided" necessitates that a judgment be made as to its reasoning for doing what it does, no? My conclusion is that they are not "misguided", which infers that they are basically "good" or even believers who have been somehow deceived and/or that their intentions are good but they are simply mistaken in how to carry out those intentions. What McLaren &co. are doing is deliberate, calculated and well planned. They know exactly what they believe and what they hope to achieve, both of which are contrary to sound biblical teaching. In short, they firmly believe that they have a "better way" and thus reject the historical biblical doctrines of the Church and the manner in which the Church should conduct itself in the world.

Jeremiah 6:16-21 (ASV) "Thus saith Jehovah, Stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way; and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls: but they said, We will not walk [therein]. And I set watchmen over you, [saying], Hearken to the sound of the trumpet; but they said, We will not hearken. Therefore hear, ye nations, and know, O congregation, what is among them. Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words; and as for my law, they have rejected it. To what purpose cometh there to me frankincense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? your burnt-offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices pleasing unto me. Therefore thus saith Jehovah, Behold, I will lay stumbling-blocks before this people; and the fathers and the sons together shall stumble against them; the neighbor and his friend shall perish."

In His grace,

As I've read this post, I have a couple of questions that come to mind. The first few are in response to Pilgrim. I will post other questions in another response to the original post.


As far as I can tell, they proclaim Christ crucified and that He came to save sinners. What is unbiblical about that? My question in response here is: What is your understanding of the Biblical Christ? I don't ask this as a point of debate, I am just curious as to where you are coming from and how you can say that "I cannot find the biblical Christ being preached nor taught in any of the Emerging Church literature, video clips, etc. that I have had the extreme displeasure of being exposed to".


What constitutes vain worship though? Just because something doesn't look like how we think it should look doesn't make it vain. What if a liturgical service is vain worship? What do we do then?


I will agree with this assessment, but the emerging church doesn't tell people to not share Christ with those they are helping. They just emphasize the importance of Jesus' social teachings. They are important, and all of us in the Christian community (even emergents) could stand to be a bit more charitable. If we don't clothe and feed homeless people, then we can't properly share the gospel with them because we aren't giving them what they need at that moment. It is possible that they are already Christians in the first place.


I really highly doubt that they are out to destroy us and our faith. This is nothing more than an unfounded personal attack on the men, and these have no place in the Christian community.

Has anyone even considered the fact that the person with the dog could have been BLIND?????

I don't mean to be rude, but, not knowing that person's situation, we have no right to judge this person because they had their dog with them. What if they have a mental handicap and they "need" their dog with them? There are many reasons they may have had their dog, and it is very unChristian of people, ESPECIALLY on a Christian website, to be making light of someone's possible health issues.

Kalled,


If we do not righteously judge (with Scripture, John 7:24) this "person" will never know truth. It really doesn't matter whether he has a dog with him or not. The rest of what you said is mere sophistry and tripe. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/3stooges.gif" alt="" />

Denny

Romans 3:22-24